nice of wired to catch up with the rest of the tech world
regardless, it's pretty cool that some guys managed to hack it onto an older laptop... what with all the "windows os / linux put on "X" product!!!" claims lately (like the win 95 /98 on psp deal), it'll be interesting to see where the mac os pops up next.
To bad this will not be supported officially by Apple (at least that is not very likely).
Some more competition in the x86 OS market would be good, and MacOSX is definitly better than Windows in many ways.
Actually, since the next Macs will apparently be Intel-based, this is Tha Fyu-chah. They'll probably rig the hardware so you can't build your own Mac, but someone will hack around that, too. Can't wait.
I think it's the pinnacle of irony that the next Macs will run on Intel, and the next XBox will run on PowerPC. Ten years ago, this would have been unthinkable.
Oh boy, thnom, you're making me flash back to ten years ago, with your unqualified 'Macs are horrid'! At the risk of an old-school platform flame war, would you care to describe the horror in more detail?
MacOSX on pc's isn't near useful right now. no real apps have been ported to work with x86 based systems. I still think it's somewhat stupid for apple to try and limit their systems to their hardware only, only hurts them in the end.
hawken: xp is nothing to the whore osx is. friend has a mac mini stock 256mb ram and it's mega fucking slow. instant he throws in 513 or more it'll perform alot better. The os and dock eat up pretty much all of the actual ram.
artists cannot be expected to work on machines under 1gb, be it mac or pc. My laptop has 1gb, my desktop widget tells me that 46% of it is being used with nothing visably open.
I used to use a lappy with 256mb, and could model some simple things in Gmax but that was about it.
[ QUOTE ]
artists cannot be expected to work on machines under 1gb, be it mac or pc. My laptop has 1gb, my desktop widget tells me that 46% of it is being used with nothing visably open.
I used to use a lappy with 256mb, and could model some simple things in Gmax but that was about it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Too bad for you as i can run Max7 (and work on highpoly models in it) on XP pro with 512mb ram while i have 10 IE windows open + Opera with 20pages in it + Winamp and some other stuff aswell.
Next year you will say you need 2gigs of ram to do the stuff you did 4 years ago with 256mb, oh well..
winamp maybe takes 2mb's on my system minamized. firefox and javaw (bittorrent) whore up around 100mb's each, which for firefox can probably be resolved.
As i dont use flash nor illustrator i dunno, but it works with Max 7 and PS and i can watch a movie while talking over ICQ/MSN :P And stuff i have ALWAYS running are winamp, bit torrent, atleast 5 IE windows, ACDsee, ICQ and MSN.
It can take a bit of time to switch between them but nothing catastrophic.
Wierd, i've a 950mhz w/ 512mb pc133 (slow stuff) and i'm able to browse with Firefox with 5 tabs open, have Xchat running in the background with 26 channels open, have MSN 7.0 running with a bunch of conversations open, Miranda open (then again miranda is nothing in hogness), and have WinAMP and Thunderbird open, yet my Q3A performance is still high ardoun 100fps and Steam is open as well as well as ZoneAlerm, mbProbe, Quicktime, Drag-to-disc, Daemontools, and Progress Quest.
Hey guys, the link that was posted has now being taken down WITH APPLES REQUEST
[ QUOTE ]
Oh boy, thnom, you're making me flash back to ten years ago, with your unqualified 'Macs are horrid'! At the risk of an old-school platform flame war, would you care to describe the horror in more detail?
[/ QUOTE ]
Sure thing. How everything seems to be about the visual side of the OS. The fades, the way it handles. I want it to have boundaries. In OSX there isn't one. Programs on that bar that dissapears and you can misclick on shit all day long, boy that is fun. Just the way it handles in general -- its not very nice. The complete lack of a second button, heh thats handy. I'll shortcut to fucking right click!! I don't use shortcuts.. I use 'J' and 'K' in max and [,] in Photoshop (J-get rid of bounding box, M-Material Editor, [+]- change brush size). Thats it-- Macs seem to depend on shortcuts because the menus all suck. How many times I've sat there gone to click the top bar, just missed -- the program is still up but the top menu is gone! Its gay.
I have to say: I have no fucking idea what you just said.
The lack of a second button? A mouse button? In OS X? OS X doesn't have buttons, you MIGHT be thinking of a mouse. Hey, guess what, if you plug a 2 or 3 button mouse into a machine running OS X, thats all supported by default. You know, they made an OS that will work depending on the users preference there.
You are mis clicking on things? Perhaps you just have spastic hands?
fades? are you talking about the dock bar? if you are you can turn all the visual stuff off.
and rick is right about plugging in a 2 or 3 button USB mouse. if you are still using one of those hockey pucks they called mice that came with the G4's then yeah.. those SUCK ASS.
my iBook does good on it's RAM. i had PS, FireFox, Illustrator, iTunes and Acrobat all running and putting together my senior portfolio for college. for 1ghz 768 DDR RAM, it handled everything like a champ.
my only complaints now is that the modem was fried in a storm and im begining to plot the death of iTunes(i need winamp on mac!)
I use a mac at college - I aren't gonna buy my own mouce that I can only use a spazzy machine. It should have a 2 button-ed mouse by default - it should come with one. I can't see ANY reason why it shouldn't.
Snem: yeh the fades - I don't like visual shitness, I want basic. I run XP with the old 98 style look - none of the colour shit.
You've got to be joking? While I agree Amiga Workbench was good, I wouldn't call it the best as such.
I certainly as hell wouldn't put the Ericsson Menu System as worse that Nokia. Sorry but I spent 2 months trying to figure out how to use everything in my Nokia with little to no success. Eventutally just gave it to a friend.
I stick with Sony-Ericsson now for a simple reason, the Interface is ridiculously easy to understand and use. Everyone I've known has prefered Ericsson's menu system to any other brand. So how the hell you could believe it's the worst is beyond me.
As far as chips go.. again I'd seriously disagree.
Best in the past was the 68K (Amiga's were done by two contractors, AMD and Motorola, the Moto 1993 chips were actually by far the worst as this was when they were introducing the PowerPC Override Chip, which weren't particularly compatible with the 68k)
I would say the best chip now would be development wise PowerPC 940 FX (as you can program your own operators), and performance wise definately has to be the AMD Athlon64 X2.
There wouldn't be a single best chip now.
As for OSX, never had any issues with it myself. Whenever I use my Mac, I have Maya, Photoshop, Shake, and iTunes about. That's about it really. Not because of performance but because that's all I use it for.
Look at the programs on it, it's a machine quite obviously built purely for art development. If your going to use it for this purpose why skimp on the RAM.
Try running Maya, Photoshop, iTunes (although on Windows i use Media Player, it's just better) and Premier Pro under Windows with less than 256MB Ram, and you'll soon watch the performance plummet. Hell use intensive programs like that on any OS and you DO NEED more RAM and Processor power.
Nothing to do with how well the OS can handle them, more to do with the programs themselves. This said Macintosh programs are all much larger in overall size. Same goes for all Unix-Based operating systems though.
Both MacOSX and Windows XP are far mre stable now as OS. I know people say they use Windows 98 still, but seriously why the hell do you want to use something so unstable? Baffling.
[ QUOTE ]
MacOSX is horrid. Macs in general are horrid. I have to use them in college and I'd prefer to use a 486.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are all sorts of stupid. I know raving mac-fans are annoying, but i'll take raving mac-fans over raving idiots any day. Anyway, i think this is good news, it's nice to have more choice in the OS area... allthough i doubt Apple will sell osx for the pc.
Okay, thnom, so your complaints are with the interface, not the machine itself.
I'm tempted to be aggro and say, 'The mouse didn't need a right-click button until Microsoft added one', but I guess I just did. Remember that the Mac was first with the mouse. I work on both platforms, and I actually use a two-button mouse on my Mac. It doesn't always give me the context menu when I right-click, but that's probably because I'm still using MacOS 9 (!!), in which case I have to hold down CTRL, which is annoying when I'm also trying to eat with my left hand, or something.
Keyboard shortcuts? Yeah. Those came from the Mac, too, I think. So it's not like they're the upstart with their lack of right-clicking.
You seem to be scarred for life by the menu-bar thing. Just because the Mac has a persistent menu bar that changes according to what app is in front doesn't mean that it's broken. When I first started using Windoze after years of Mac-dom, I was upset by the use of a screen-size window for each app. It was like they were all in boxes! Same as you, only in reverse.
Sounds like your Mac probs would be fixed by a few more regular hours in the pilot seat. Then you'd just have the 'CTRL or CMND' shortcut problem, where your fingers reach for the wrong keys. Like me.
'The mouse didn't need a right-click button until Microsoft added one'
The horse cart didn't need a motor before Ford added one. The videogame didn't need a control pad before Nintendo added one. The mouse didn't need a scrollwheel, either but it's much better if it has one. Hell, many 3d apps use three buttons, would you really like juggling even more keyboard keys? There's five fingers on your mouse hand, no reason to use only one of them!
Jusin: Well, then it's usability for a little experienced users or less confusion for absolute beginners. Which one would YOU choose, considering that those beginners will have enough experience to use two buttons after a few weeks (if it takes them any longer I wonder how they manage to use the computer at all, should be close to impossible when you don't know which button does what)? Or as somebody on another forum put it: "Are those people confused by the pedals in their car, too? OMG, there's not one, not two, count 'em, THREE of them! I wonder how they manage to drive a car with all its levers, pedals and wheels when they are confused by two buttons on one mouse?"
Macs were designed so you don't need two buttons, but it's a silly argument anyway, it's like not buying an ipod because it has earbuds. This is a $10 mouse we're talking about, usually just a MS optical mouse with Dell or Gateway stamped on it. I'm pretty sure apple will add their new multi button mouse as an option when building a new system as well.
The mouse is a prime example of one of the problems with Macs: It is Apple's (or should I say Steve Job's) inability to admit that they were wrong about certain user interface decisions
The real innovation in GUI design is done on Linux today. KDE or Gnome are already good in that regard, but sadly quite conservative about certain features 'inherited' by Windows or Macs.
But the smaller desktop enviroments are where the real fun starts. Recent projects like the Mezzo desktop or e17 could revolutionize the way GUIs work. And the best thing, the work exceptionally well for inexperienced users, but also for real experts. There is no hiding of features, and stupid stuff like that.
But yeah did I mention these are still very much work in progress? So it is not really ready for the end user, but the promise is great.
Oh and Windows Vista? What is new about that, other that that DRM crap??? At least there is no visible improvement in the GUI, other that transparent and rotable 3d windows
[ QUOTE ]
Sounds like your Mac probs would be fixed by a few more regular hours in the pilot seat. Then you'd just have the 'CTRL or CMND' shortcut problem, where your fingers reach for the wrong keys. Like me.
[/ QUOTE ]
On MacOSX, I just use my Microsoft Explorer Mouse. You get complete control over what's going on.
It might seem like a bother changing from the 1-Button mouse and it might seem backward to some people; but remember the mouse and keyboard are part of what make Macinotsh what they are.
For Windows, I destinctly remember that Windows 3.1 even 3.5 still only used a 1-Button interface. 2-Button Mice however had been common place on PCs since what '88? atleast. Yet it wasn't until Windows 95 that they became more of a requirement. Windows didn't force users to upgrade, they simply embrased the technology used by the majority of users. Microsoft have always been like this.
Why do you think Windows Vista requires a 3D Accelerator? Because Microsoft are trying to force everyone to upgrade? Sorry but if you don't already have a 3D Accelerator card then perhaps you should've updated your system before 1998 hit.
It's like MMX, that's only used in Windows now because every CPU has it now. If it was only a handful, then drivers would still completely rely on the video card for 16-32bit colours.
As I said, the mouse has never bothered me simply because even my Alienware desktop PC came with a horrible mouse. Switched all of my mice to MS Explorer (1/2nd Generation) As they feel the best to use. I'm sure every other serioues computer user does the same, they swap to the mouse they prefer. In many cases this is a Logitech high-performance gaming mouse.
All of these will work fine under MacOSX (hell Microsoft provide a driver CD that allows you to use back to MacOS6!)
So really should never be a problem.
[ QUOTE ]
Oh and Windows Vista? What is new about that, other that that DRM crap??? At least there is no visible improvement in the GUI, other that transparent and rotable 3d windows
[/ QUOTE ]
One word. Avalon
Windows Vista on the out-ward appearance, doesn't look that much different from Windows XP. Believe me this is a good thing.
When you think about how many people seem to hang-on dearly to the old Windows Designs.
With Windows 95, everyone wanted the 3.1 Interface.
With Windows XP, everyone wanted the 95 Interface back.
So it's actually a sensible decision that Microsoft didn't change the apperance too far from before. Everything has a better more flowing colour-scheme now. This is a good thing after the whole 'duplo' XP look.
All of the interfaces are familiar, but they're far more alive now. Everything is animated it feels like it's showing you what you want it to do. You get that friendlier vibe from using it.
Visual Styles are more evolved and extendable than they were in Windows 5.0-5.2.
This on the surface only seems like a minor change. So what you want to do is introduce the Avalon Element to the desktop.
Scripted Interfaces isn't anything new. Apple and *nix users have had stuff like Blackbox and Gnome for a good few years now. Provides them with a way to change the layout of thier desktops to suit the without much fuss.
All pretty standard right?
Microsoft decided to take this concept, but didn't seem happy with just being limited to altering the style, position, images of the set Interface design.
XAML provides you complete access to the entire Windows libraries, this includes access to C# Scripting for more complex tasks that you can assign to XAML classes and reuse later.
Again nothing too impressive yet right?
Well let's say, you really like the idea of having a GameCube style Window for your new application.
In the past this would've been a case of sorting out a 3D system, attaching DirectX / OpenGL, coding up the engine to use, blah blah. You'd be looking a good few weeks work alone.
Within Vista, this same job could take you a day if that to complete. Letting the program know where everything should go, creating the environment cube, transforming icons into cubes. Hell you could add in full control from a controller plugged-in.
Unless you using specifics to your application, you could then simply attach this script to any application and it'd do the same task.
While simple things like getting the windows to fly like a flag while it's being dragged, doesn't seem that impressive. Fact is, that would be a 30minute task to do.
What you could achieve in a day, would be to completely transform the entire Interface of the Window itself into something truely imaginative.
You have full 2D, 3D control over every aspect of your programs. Like with games, the only limitation is your imagination.
I hope that we really do see some imagination comming from the community too. It does after all make scripting on the other OSs look like it's from the dark ages.
[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think Windows Vista requires a 3D Accelerator? Because Microsoft are trying to force everyone to upgrade? Sorry but if you don't already have a 3D Accelerator card then perhaps you should've updated your system before 1998 hit.
[/ QUOTE ]
Certainly true, but for GUI innovation you don't really need new hardware. All that is needed are a few good ideas and a programmer.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure every other serioues computer user does the same, they swap to the mouse they prefer.
[/ QUOTE ]
No every serious computer user builds his own PC, of course including his mouse of choice
[ QUOTE ]
One word. Avalon
Windows Vista on the out-ward appearance, doesn't look that much different from Windows XP. Believe me this is a good thing.
[/ QUOTE ]
No it is not. Consistency is good, but only if the system you are conserving isn't so inheritly flawed that it needs a serious rebuild all the way back to Windows95.
[ QUOTE ]
So it's actually a sensible decision that Microsoft didn't change the apperance too far from before. Everything has a better more flowing colour-scheme now. This is a good thing after the whole 'duplo' XP look.
All of the interfaces are familiar, but they're far more alive now. Everything is animated it feels like it's showing you what you want it to do. You get that friendlier vibe from using it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ahh a classic... you get a 'friendlier vibe' from it! Great but what about real improvements in useability and userfriendlyness? All it does improve are graphical bells and whisels??? Is that it?
[ QUOTE ]
I hope that we really do see some imagination comming from the community too. It does after all make scripting on the other OSs look like it's from the dark ages.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, a scriptable interface is a good thing to have (that is why it was introduced a long time ago in other GUIs, like you said).
But 'delegating' all the innovation to user plugins, while having a really bad default GUI is not really userfriendly in my book.
Oh and while Microsoft plays catch-up with the scripting interfaces of other OS (and adding useless stuff like 3D windows, which was also done by SUN and their Java Desktop first), the real innovation in scripting happens in small GUIs like the Mezzo desktop, which is customizable by anyone who knows a bit of webdesign
[ QUOTE ]
I agree, a scriptable interface is a good thing to have (that is why it was introduced a long time ago in other GUIs, like you said).
But 'delegating' all the innovation to user plugins, while having a really bad default GUI is not really userfriendly in my book.
Oh and while Microsoft plays catch-up with the scripting interfaces of other OS (and adding useless stuff like 3D windows, which was also done by SUN and their Java Desktop first), the real innovation in scripting happens in small GUIs like the Mezzo desktop, which is customizable by anyone who knows a bit of webdesign.
[/ QUOTE ]
True, Microsoft adding this is a long-time comming. Although even with what, 6-7years headstart the Linux Scripted Interfaces are still only really limited in how useful they are.
I mean you can change the size, position, images, etc. of the 'X' Close button. What you can't do however is change X from a button to cloth cursor so that you can wipe the window away.
Alright so that's a fruitless purpose, but my point is that your not limited to the traditional sense of UI design now.
You can create your own Control, Class, and work around that. To do this in the Linux scripted UI Systems, you would need to hard-code the changes then make sure everyone had the updated version of the runtime.
With Avalon it's a case of, you script it and distribute. Bam! your end-user has that feature.
So while yeah this is a long-time comming, Microsoft have added it in a way to be less of a Visual Toy; and more of a tool that provides developers with a backbone that they can expand upon.
Not really a case of what they've added but how.
It's just a huge let down that actually Avalon is about the *only* real improvement that Vista will see.
[ QUOTE ]
No every serious computer user builds his own PC, of course including his mouse of choice.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, well that depends doesn't it. Whenever I build a new system from scratch it can take me several days to find all the parts and decide what would be the best combination. Like a week to wait for the parts. Another few hours to format the hard disks and install Windows; Install all the drivers and software (that's a good afternoon right there).
Create a Linux partition and install SuSE (another 8-9hours lost.. SOOOOOOOOOOOO slow to install!)
Oh then it can take another half a day atleast to optimise both for the hardware.
In the end I can just order a similar spec system from Alienware for very little mark-up, everything pre-installed, everything optimised. Get it ready to use in something like 2-3days (seems to be thier standard delivery policy).. if anything goes wrong, I have my Ghost DVD and a 3year warrenty.
So buying the keyboard and mouse seperate, has never seemed like a huge issue. Same goes my Apple.. this said, I've never seen the parts for them being sold seperat in the same way IBM-Compatibles have been.
On the point of Macintosh though; anyone seen thier new Mouse?
Strange installing SuSE is faster than installing XP on my system, but you are right creating you own PC takes quite a bit of time. For someone with very little time it might not be worth it (time is money etc).
Replies
regardless, it's pretty cool that some guys managed to hack it onto an older laptop... what with all the "windows os / linux put on "X" product!!!" claims lately (like the win 95 /98 on psp deal), it'll be interesting to see where the mac os pops up next.
Some more competition in the x86 OS market would be good, and MacOSX is definitly better than Windows in many ways.
I think it's the pinnacle of irony that the next Macs will run on Intel, and the next XBox will run on PowerPC. Ten years ago, this would have been unthinkable.
Oh boy, thnom, you're making me flash back to ten years ago, with your unqualified 'Macs are horrid'! At the risk of an old-school platform flame war, would you care to describe the horror in more detail?
/jzero
And win95 on the psp anyone?
http://psp-news.dcemu.co.uk/bochspsp.shtml
I used to use a lappy with 256mb, and could model some simple things in Gmax but that was about it.
i have xp pro with the core kept in memory, lots of background procs running, and barely using 100 mb
artists cannot be expected to work on machines under 1gb, be it mac or pc. My laptop has 1gb, my desktop widget tells me that 46% of it is being used with nothing visably open.
I used to use a lappy with 256mb, and could model some simple things in Gmax but that was about it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Too bad for you as i can run Max7 (and work on highpoly models in it) on XP pro with 512mb ram while i have 10 IE windows open + Opera with 20pages in it + Winamp and some other stuff aswell.
Next year you will say you need 2gigs of ram to do the stuff you did 4 years ago with 256mb, oh well..
It can take a bit of time to switch between them but nothing catastrophic.
The secret? Not using XP
Porting OSX to the PC was just a fun past time for some bored nut. So that's pretty cool, I guess I like it toooo.......
You ARE bored...
(amiga) Workbench | (Sony Ericsson) T10
CHIP: best <-- | --> worst
Motorola circa 1993 | Motorola now.
[ QUOTE ]
Oh boy, thnom, you're making me flash back to ten years ago, with your unqualified 'Macs are horrid'! At the risk of an old-school platform flame war, would you care to describe the horror in more detail?
[/ QUOTE ]
Sure thing. How everything seems to be about the visual side of the OS. The fades, the way it handles. I want it to have boundaries. In OSX there isn't one. Programs on that bar that dissapears and you can misclick on shit all day long, boy that is fun. Just the way it handles in general -- its not very nice. The complete lack of a second button, heh thats handy. I'll shortcut to fucking right click!! I don't use shortcuts.. I use 'J' and 'K' in max and [,] in Photoshop (J-get rid of bounding box, M-Material Editor, [+]- change brush size). Thats it-- Macs seem to depend on shortcuts because the menus all suck. How many times I've sat there gone to click the top bar, just missed -- the program is still up but the top menu is gone! Its gay.
The lack of a second button? A mouse button? In OS X? OS X doesn't have buttons, you MIGHT be thinking of a mouse. Hey, guess what, if you plug a 2 or 3 button mouse into a machine running OS X, thats all supported by default. You know, they made an OS that will work depending on the users preference there.
You are mis clicking on things? Perhaps you just have spastic hands?
and rick is right about plugging in a 2 or 3 button USB mouse. if you are still using one of those hockey pucks they called mice that came with the G4's then yeah.. those SUCK ASS.
my iBook does good on it's RAM. i had PS, FireFox, Illustrator, iTunes and Acrobat all running and putting together my senior portfolio for college. for 1ghz 768 DDR RAM, it handled everything like a champ.
my only complaints now is that the modem was fried in a storm and im begining to plot the death of iTunes(i need winamp on mac!)
Snem: yeh the fades - I don't like visual shitness, I want basic. I run XP with the old 98 style look - none of the colour shit.
I can't see ANY reason why it shouldn't.
Because Apple tries to appeal even to people who can't talk and keep the saliva in their mouth at the same time.
OS: best <-- | --> worst
(amiga) Workbench | (Sony Ericsson) T10
CHIP: best <-- | --> worst
Motorola circa 1993 | Motorola now.
[/ QUOTE ]
You've got to be joking? While I agree Amiga Workbench was good, I wouldn't call it the best as such.
I certainly as hell wouldn't put the Ericsson Menu System as worse that Nokia. Sorry but I spent 2 months trying to figure out how to use everything in my Nokia with little to no success. Eventutally just gave it to a friend.
I stick with Sony-Ericsson now for a simple reason, the Interface is ridiculously easy to understand and use. Everyone I've known has prefered Ericsson's menu system to any other brand. So how the hell you could believe it's the worst is beyond me.
As far as chips go.. again I'd seriously disagree.
Best in the past was the 68K (Amiga's were done by two contractors, AMD and Motorola, the Moto 1993 chips were actually by far the worst as this was when they were introducing the PowerPC Override Chip, which weren't particularly compatible with the 68k)
I would say the best chip now would be development wise PowerPC 940 FX (as you can program your own operators), and performance wise definately has to be the AMD Athlon64 X2.
There wouldn't be a single best chip now.
As for OSX, never had any issues with it myself. Whenever I use my Mac, I have Maya, Photoshop, Shake, and iTunes about. That's about it really. Not because of performance but because that's all I use it for.
Look at the programs on it, it's a machine quite obviously built purely for art development. If your going to use it for this purpose why skimp on the RAM.
Try running Maya, Photoshop, iTunes (although on Windows i use Media Player, it's just better) and Premier Pro under Windows with less than 256MB Ram, and you'll soon watch the performance plummet. Hell use intensive programs like that on any OS and you DO NEED more RAM and Processor power.
Nothing to do with how well the OS can handle them, more to do with the programs themselves. This said Macintosh programs are all much larger in overall size. Same goes for all Unix-Based operating systems though.
Both MacOSX and Windows XP are far mre stable now as OS. I know people say they use Windows 98 still, but seriously why the hell do you want to use something so unstable? Baffling.
MacOSX is horrid. Macs in general are horrid. I have to use them in college and I'd prefer to use a 486.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are all sorts of stupid. I know raving mac-fans are annoying, but i'll take raving mac-fans over raving idiots any day. Anyway, i think this is good news, it's nice to have more choice in the OS area... allthough i doubt Apple will sell osx for the pc.
I'm tempted to be aggro and say, 'The mouse didn't need a right-click button until Microsoft added one', but I guess I just did. Remember that the Mac was first with the mouse. I work on both platforms, and I actually use a two-button mouse on my Mac. It doesn't always give me the context menu when I right-click, but that's probably because I'm still using MacOS 9 (!!), in which case I have to hold down CTRL, which is annoying when I'm also trying to eat with my left hand, or something.
Keyboard shortcuts? Yeah. Those came from the Mac, too, I think. So it's not like they're the upstart with their lack of right-clicking.
You seem to be scarred for life by the menu-bar thing. Just because the Mac has a persistent menu bar that changes according to what app is in front doesn't mean that it's broken. When I first started using Windoze after years of Mac-dom, I was upset by the use of a screen-size window for each app. It was like they were all in boxes! Same as you, only in reverse.
Sounds like your Mac probs would be fixed by a few more regular hours in the pilot seat. Then you'd just have the 'CTRL or CMND' shortcut problem, where your fingers reach for the wrong keys. Like me.
/jzero
The horse cart didn't need a motor before Ford added one. The videogame didn't need a control pad before Nintendo added one. The mouse didn't need a scrollwheel, either but it's much better if it has one. Hell, many 3d apps use three buttons, would you really like juggling even more keyboard keys? There's five fingers on your mouse hand, no reason to use only one of them!
Oh yeah, with varients of *nix running on pretty much everything I don't see why everyone is so surprised OSX can run on a PC.
Macs were designed so you don't need two buttons, but it's a silly argument anyway, it's like not buying an ipod because it has earbuds. This is a $10 mouse we're talking about, usually just a MS optical mouse with Dell or Gateway stamped on it. I'm pretty sure apple will add their new multi button mouse as an option when building a new system as well.
The real innovation in GUI design is done on Linux today. KDE or Gnome are already good in that regard, but sadly quite conservative about certain features 'inherited' by Windows or Macs.
But the smaller desktop enviroments are where the real fun starts. Recent projects like the Mezzo desktop or e17 could revolutionize the way GUIs work. And the best thing, the work exceptionally well for inexperienced users, but also for real experts. There is no hiding of features, and stupid stuff like that.
But yeah did I mention these are still very much work in progress? So it is not really ready for the end user, but the promise is great.
Oh and Windows Vista? What is new about that, other that that DRM crap??? At least there is no visible improvement in the GUI, other that transparent and rotable 3d windows
Sounds like your Mac probs would be fixed by a few more regular hours in the pilot seat. Then you'd just have the 'CTRL or CMND' shortcut problem, where your fingers reach for the wrong keys. Like me.
[/ QUOTE ]
On MacOSX, I just use my Microsoft Explorer Mouse. You get complete control over what's going on.
It might seem like a bother changing from the 1-Button mouse and it might seem backward to some people; but remember the mouse and keyboard are part of what make Macinotsh what they are.
For Windows, I destinctly remember that Windows 3.1 even 3.5 still only used a 1-Button interface. 2-Button Mice however had been common place on PCs since what '88? atleast. Yet it wasn't until Windows 95 that they became more of a requirement. Windows didn't force users to upgrade, they simply embrased the technology used by the majority of users. Microsoft have always been like this.
Why do you think Windows Vista requires a 3D Accelerator? Because Microsoft are trying to force everyone to upgrade? Sorry but if you don't already have a 3D Accelerator card then perhaps you should've updated your system before 1998 hit.
It's like MMX, that's only used in Windows now because every CPU has it now. If it was only a handful, then drivers would still completely rely on the video card for 16-32bit colours.
As I said, the mouse has never bothered me simply because even my Alienware desktop PC came with a horrible mouse. Switched all of my mice to MS Explorer (1/2nd Generation) As they feel the best to use. I'm sure every other serioues computer user does the same, they swap to the mouse they prefer. In many cases this is a Logitech high-performance gaming mouse.
All of these will work fine under MacOSX (hell Microsoft provide a driver CD that allows you to use back to MacOS6!)
So really should never be a problem.
[ QUOTE ]
Oh and Windows Vista? What is new about that, other that that DRM crap??? At least there is no visible improvement in the GUI, other that transparent and rotable 3d windows
[/ QUOTE ]
One word. Avalon
Windows Vista on the out-ward appearance, doesn't look that much different from Windows XP. Believe me this is a good thing.
When you think about how many people seem to hang-on dearly to the old Windows Designs.
With Windows 95, everyone wanted the 3.1 Interface.
With Windows XP, everyone wanted the 95 Interface back.
So it's actually a sensible decision that Microsoft didn't change the apperance too far from before. Everything has a better more flowing colour-scheme now. This is a good thing after the whole 'duplo' XP look.
All of the interfaces are familiar, but they're far more alive now. Everything is animated it feels like it's showing you what you want it to do. You get that friendlier vibe from using it.
Visual Styles are more evolved and extendable than they were in Windows 5.0-5.2.
This on the surface only seems like a minor change. So what you want to do is introduce the Avalon Element to the desktop.
Scripted Interfaces isn't anything new. Apple and *nix users have had stuff like Blackbox and Gnome for a good few years now. Provides them with a way to change the layout of thier desktops to suit the without much fuss.
All pretty standard right?
Microsoft decided to take this concept, but didn't seem happy with just being limited to altering the style, position, images of the set Interface design.
XAML provides you complete access to the entire Windows libraries, this includes access to C# Scripting for more complex tasks that you can assign to XAML classes and reuse later.
Again nothing too impressive yet right?
Well let's say, you really like the idea of having a GameCube style Window for your new application.
In the past this would've been a case of sorting out a 3D system, attaching DirectX / OpenGL, coding up the engine to use, blah blah. You'd be looking a good few weeks work alone.
Within Vista, this same job could take you a day if that to complete. Letting the program know where everything should go, creating the environment cube, transforming icons into cubes. Hell you could add in full control from a controller plugged-in.
Unless you using specifics to your application, you could then simply attach this script to any application and it'd do the same task.
While simple things like getting the windows to fly like a flag while it's being dragged, doesn't seem that impressive. Fact is, that would be a 30minute task to do.
What you could achieve in a day, would be to completely transform the entire Interface of the Window itself into something truely imaginative.
You have full 2D, 3D control over every aspect of your programs. Like with games, the only limitation is your imagination.
I hope that we really do see some imagination comming from the community too. It does after all make scripting on the other OSs look like it's from the dark ages.
Why do you think Windows Vista requires a 3D Accelerator? Because Microsoft are trying to force everyone to upgrade? Sorry but if you don't already have a 3D Accelerator card then perhaps you should've updated your system before 1998 hit.
[/ QUOTE ]
Certainly true, but for GUI innovation you don't really need new hardware. All that is needed are a few good ideas and a programmer.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure every other serioues computer user does the same, they swap to the mouse they prefer.
[/ QUOTE ]
No every serious computer user builds his own PC, of course including his mouse of choice
[ QUOTE ]
One word. Avalon
Windows Vista on the out-ward appearance, doesn't look that much different from Windows XP. Believe me this is a good thing.
[/ QUOTE ]
No it is not. Consistency is good, but only if the system you are conserving isn't so inheritly flawed that it needs a serious rebuild all the way back to Windows95.
[ QUOTE ]
So it's actually a sensible decision that Microsoft didn't change the apperance too far from before. Everything has a better more flowing colour-scheme now. This is a good thing after the whole 'duplo' XP look.
All of the interfaces are familiar, but they're far more alive now. Everything is animated it feels like it's showing you what you want it to do. You get that friendlier vibe from using it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ahh a classic... you get a 'friendlier vibe' from it! Great but what about real improvements in useability and userfriendlyness? All it does improve are graphical bells and whisels??? Is that it?
[ QUOTE ]
I hope that we really do see some imagination comming from the community too. It does after all make scripting on the other OSs look like it's from the dark ages.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, a scriptable interface is a good thing to have (that is why it was introduced a long time ago in other GUIs, like you said).
But 'delegating' all the innovation to user plugins, while having a really bad default GUI is not really userfriendly in my book.
Oh and while Microsoft plays catch-up with the scripting interfaces of other OS (and adding useless stuff like 3D windows, which was also done by SUN and their Java Desktop first), the real innovation in scripting happens in small GUIs like the Mezzo desktop, which is customizable by anyone who knows a bit of webdesign
and now: let the flamewar begin
It's just like 1995 again. Thanks, guys.
/jzero
I agree, a scriptable interface is a good thing to have (that is why it was introduced a long time ago in other GUIs, like you said).
But 'delegating' all the innovation to user plugins, while having a really bad default GUI is not really userfriendly in my book.
Oh and while Microsoft plays catch-up with the scripting interfaces of other OS (and adding useless stuff like 3D windows, which was also done by SUN and their Java Desktop first), the real innovation in scripting happens in small GUIs like the Mezzo desktop, which is customizable by anyone who knows a bit of webdesign.
[/ QUOTE ]
True, Microsoft adding this is a long-time comming. Although even with what, 6-7years headstart the Linux Scripted Interfaces are still only really limited in how useful they are.
I mean you can change the size, position, images, etc. of the 'X' Close button. What you can't do however is change X from a button to cloth cursor so that you can wipe the window away.
Alright so that's a fruitless purpose, but my point is that your not limited to the traditional sense of UI design now.
You can create your own Control, Class, and work around that. To do this in the Linux scripted UI Systems, you would need to hard-code the changes then make sure everyone had the updated version of the runtime.
With Avalon it's a case of, you script it and distribute. Bam! your end-user has that feature.
So while yeah this is a long-time comming, Microsoft have added it in a way to be less of a Visual Toy; and more of a tool that provides developers with a backbone that they can expand upon.
Not really a case of what they've added but how.
It's just a huge let down that actually Avalon is about the *only* real improvement that Vista will see.
[ QUOTE ]
No every serious computer user builds his own PC, of course including his mouse of choice.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, well that depends doesn't it. Whenever I build a new system from scratch it can take me several days to find all the parts and decide what would be the best combination. Like a week to wait for the parts. Another few hours to format the hard disks and install Windows; Install all the drivers and software (that's a good afternoon right there).
Create a Linux partition and install SuSE (another 8-9hours lost.. SOOOOOOOOOOOO slow to install!)
Oh then it can take another half a day atleast to optimise both for the hardware.
In the end I can just order a similar spec system from Alienware for very little mark-up, everything pre-installed, everything optimised. Get it ready to use in something like 2-3days (seems to be thier standard delivery policy).. if anything goes wrong, I have my Ghost DVD and a 3year warrenty.
So buying the keyboard and mouse seperate, has never seemed like a huge issue. Same goes my Apple.. this said, I've never seen the parts for them being sold seperat in the same way IBM-Compatibles have been.
On the point of Macintosh though; anyone seen thier new Mouse?